2.3 Cultural Objects
Taking actual objects as our starting point (rather than the social groups who
appropriate them) offers a new perspective on representations. In this case, objects
are not considered as independent and decontextualized entities, but are observed
through the prism of the history of aesthetic representations, which “makes it
possible to think about knowledge, ideologies and the techniques that are implemented—which should certainly avoid a linear story form—the relationships
between the object of the representation and its production or reception” [21].
The cultural object is a reference to “all concrete objects (books, writings,
paintings, photographs, films, architecture, sculpture, etc.) resulting from a formal
production and intended to produce in those who receive it a symbolic ‘effect’
(aesthetic contemplation, subscription to its values, producing a belief, etc.)” [6].
This type of object “is part of a civilizational and historical context and participates in the definition of the worldview of which it is a part” [22]. It is disseminated
in communities of varying homogeneity and scope. Its influence on social reality is
therefore difficult to assess and the researcher must collect external data. They can
then compare the cultural object with other sources to determine its function in the
public space and its contextual significance, or examine its reception by critics.
Comparisons, which depend on the availability of sources, should not however be
carried out at the expense of the internal analysis of the object. In practice, the
object is involved in the formation of social processes, but remains a product whose
constituent elements must be carefully studied, as it is the starting point for
research.
Cultural objects relating to nuclear accidents are very diverse in terms of both
form and content. However, they all approach the subject from a dramatized angle,
as is shown in the confusion between a nuclear reactor and a nuclear weapon.
Objects draw upon radioactive imagery marked by Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the
anxiety generated during the Cold War, and the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction. The image of the mushroom cloud is particularly evoked as a representation of the explosion of a nuclear reactor. As an example, the city of Springfield
is destroyed in an episode of The Simpsons [23] as a result of the explosion of a
nuclear plant, in the same way that Hiroshima was razed to the ground by Little Boy.
The similarity with reality highlights the discursive potential of a cultural object,
which maintains a dual relationship with social representations.
7
7
The position of the author, as a representational actor, must be taken into account in this process.
Their role is easily identifiable when it concerns a novel or a comic book. The notion of authorship
becomes more ambiguous with respect to a film. The director cannot by themselves embody the
author, and is seen more as a “virtual home”, a “speaker”, or the “subject of filmic discourse” [24].
The discourse is therefore not always individualized and can result from a collective effort.
142
A. Portelli
Taking actual objects as our starting point (rather than the social groups who
appropriate them) offers a new perspective on representations. In this case, objects
are not considered as independent and decontextualized entities, but are observed
through the prism of the history of aesthetic representations, which “makes it
possible to think about knowledge, ideologies and the techniques that are implemented—which should certainly avoid a linear story form—the relationships
between the object of the representation and its production or reception” [21].
The cultural object is a reference to “all concrete objects (books, writings,
paintings, photographs, films, architecture, sculpture, etc.) resulting from a formal
production and intended to produce in those who receive it a symbolic ‘effect’
(aesthetic contemplation, subscription to its values, producing a belief, etc.)” [6].
This type of object “is part of a civilizational and historical context and participates in the definition of the worldview of which it is a part” [22]. It is disseminated
in communities of varying homogeneity and scope. Its influence on social reality is
therefore difficult to assess and the researcher must collect external data. They can
then compare the cultural object with other sources to determine its function in the
public space and its contextual significance, or examine its reception by critics.
Comparisons, which depend on the availability of sources, should not however be
carried out at the expense of the internal analysis of the object. In practice, the
object is involved in the formation of social processes, but remains a product whose
constituent elements must be carefully studied, as it is the starting point for
research.
Cultural objects relating to nuclear accidents are very diverse in terms of both
form and content. However, they all approach the subject from a dramatized angle,
as is shown in the confusion between a nuclear reactor and a nuclear weapon.
Objects draw upon radioactive imagery marked by Hiroshima and Nagasaki, the
anxiety generated during the Cold War, and the proliferation of weapons of mass
destruction. The image of the mushroom cloud is particularly evoked as a representation of the explosion of a nuclear reactor. As an example, the city of Springfield
is destroyed in an episode of The Simpsons [23] as a result of the explosion of a
nuclear plant, in the same way that Hiroshima was razed to the ground by Little Boy.
The similarity with reality highlights the discursive potential of a cultural object,
which maintains a dual relationship with social representations.
7
7
The position of the author, as a representational actor, must be taken into account in this process.
Their role is easily identifiable when it concerns a novel or a comic book. The notion of authorship
becomes more ambiguous with respect to a film. The director cannot by themselves embody the
author, and is seen more as a “virtual home”, a “speaker”, or the “subject of filmic discourse” [24].
The discourse is therefore not always individualized and can result from a collective effort.
142
A. Portelli